OzzieMandias

Owen looks like he's one step further in terms fitness and form, which is the good news for us, but Smith, though not acquitting himself badly, showed little to convince me that he belongs at this level.

The Guardian didn't even run the photos, never mind potentially faking them. It reported their existence in another newspaper.

England's lack of a top-class goalkeeper is the national side's second-biggest worry after having a complete cretin as a manager, but why the fuck should anyone find this "embarrassing"?

I hope you are correct. It seems like the proper time for him to come good. Playing for Ingurlund a'narl. I can see this playing out like that Argies game when Owen scored late for the winner. Actually, think he had two that match, right? Crespo for the Argies, IIRC? Can't remember who scored theirs. But to be like that game would involve Germany withdrawing all their best players after going ahead. As their squad is even more depleted than ours, I can't see it happening. I just think Owen will notch a goal or two and give hope to the England faithful that he can lead the front line. Prove he still has it sort of thing. As I say, I hope you're right. I fear, however, that his lack of match fitness will show.

you must have been a right miserable bugger before 1992 mackems.gif What on earth are you wibbling on about? Are you claiming that Alan Smith (simply not good enough a striker for England, IMO) and an unfit Michael Owen who has played about 30 minutes of competitive football in the last year are the ideal front pairing for England? No, I'm saying you must have been a right miserable and moaning bugger if you watched NUFC pre-1992 if you are moaning on about us having 2 players spearheading the England attack, injuries or not. Oh I see. You were just talking a lot of gratuitous tripe.

I hope you are correct. It seems like the proper time for him to come good. Playing for Ingurlund a'narl. I can see this playing out like that Argies game when Owen scored late for the winner. Actually, think he had two that match, right? Crespo for the Argies, IIRC? Can't remember who scored theirs. But to be like that game would involve Germany withdrawing all their best players after going ahead. As their squad is even more depleted than ours, I can't see it happening.

I hope you are correct.

you must have been a right miserable bugger before 1992 mackems.gif What on earth are you wibbling on about? Are you claiming that Alan Smith (simply not good enough a striker for England, IMO) and an unfit Michael Owen who has played about 30 minutes of competitive football in the last year are the ideal front pairing for England?

I don't think Sky still have shares in either Man U or the mackems.

Surely, "you hord it here forst"?

I was talking to someone last night who has a good mate pretty high up in Sports World and apparently it's fairly common knowledge in the higher ecehelons of the organisation that Ashley is none too happy with the state he's found the club in and would be willing to sell if there was a suitable buyer. If that's the case then all the talk of what a great, self-made, businessman he is, is utter sh!te. No-one goes into a 150m investment without a thorough investigation of the business they are buying, if that was his way he wouldn't of made it any further than the half arsed local sports shop he started out with. Forgetting the fact that no-one really knows what Laura thinks, his business history is that of buy low and build it up. There is no history of selling out, there is no history of giving up on one of his investments that he has taken full ownership of. If all he wanted was a quick turn around why delist the club? Earlier in this thread I mentioned that the media here likened him to Howard Hughes. Hughes was constantly hounded in the press with rumour and speculation and this was the 1950s, imagine what it is like in this day and age of everything being scrutinized on football forums, in the tabloids, television and radio - the media has to justify its existence therefore it looks for any angle, something I doubt Ashley would of even considered before thinking about buying a football club, let alone the one with the largest neurotic fan base in the world. Ashley for the money he paid could have bought almost any premier league club, he didn't and there must be a reason why. I was also under that impression but I read somewhere that because he didn't make an offer to buy the club outright, he bought pieces that built up over time, he couldn't undertake due dilligence where the prospective purchaser gets to take a look at the state of the business including the accounts. That's why he quickly undertook his "internal review" to find out exactly what he'd got himself into. The review has revealed that the club is in a worse state than he anticipated, including £80 million of debt. Perhaps his chairman is now advising him to sell and take even a small profit. Possible but let's be honest most of us knew the club was at least 60m in debt just from the various NUFC finance sites that have been about for the last 3-4 years. You'd hope a man who allegedly prides himself on the people that he surrounds himself with business wise might actually had someone look into things, a trawl or two of most NUFC message boards and you'd be at least aware of the concerns for the clubs debt levels. Like I said, the media needs to justify its existence and perpetuating rumour and speculation is an easy way to drive headlines. (By the way, Mike, if you or one of your many advisors are reading this - you stepped up to the plate, now follow through and actually turn our club into the huge club it has always had the potential to become.) Nail on head. I agree with all of that as well, but didn't Mort say recently that there had been some sort of creative accounting going on that had "hidden" a lot of the debt. I'm not an accountant so I don't know the technicalities, but I got the impression that the new lot had been a little outsmarted by the old lot. I don't think there was any real statement from Mort about financial or accounting malpractice, was there? Every company in the country does soem form of creative accounting, or uses the loopholes available to it. He didn't speak of malpractice, but he did talk about future revenues being spent before we had them and "things like that".

I'd feel prouder if I thought they were up to the job.

http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2153626,00.html http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/euro_2008/article2303028.ece

But not ones that owned toy shops.

Haven't you heard of Icelandic efficiency?

The sooner Jol's position becomes completely untenable, the more likely that Spurs will end up replacing him with someone really mediocre. I therefore urge all London-based Toon fans to dress up like Spurs supporters and egg the fucker's house.

I'm with you there.

We could equally not trust him. It won't make much difference either way. That's fair enough. blueyes.gif I was just trying to point out that we don't really have any choice in the matter. He owns the joint lock stock and barrel. He can do what he wants, whe he wants, how he wants and there's not a thing we can do about it. He's taken us off the Stock Market, which is his prerogative, and I'm assuming that the club won't be publishing any accounts for the foreseeable... We've got a choice - back him and the club, whilst crossing our fingers behind our backs, or turn on him and question his intentions. I'll go for the former thanks. Actually, it's true that if we choose to trust him -- because trusting or not trusting is actually a choice -- the result will be a happier, more confident club.

We could equally not trust him. It won't make much difference either way. That's fair enough. blueyes.gif I was just trying to point out that we don't really have any choice in the matter. He owns the joint lock stock and barrel. He can do what he wants, whe he wants, how he wants and there's not a thing we can do about it. He's taken us off the Stock Market, which is his prerogative, and I'm assuming that the club won't be publishing any accounts for the foreseeable... We've got a choice - back him and the club, whilst crossing our fingers behind our backs, or turn on him and question his intentions. I'll go for the former thanks. Thing is though this is how all football clubs were run 15 years ago Thing is also, though, that this is how the most successful clubs are being run today.

We could equally not trust him. It won't make much difference either way.

So you live in London but you DON'T hate Tottenham?!?

And so does every club's owner.

"... and they will just have to live without the £70 million I was going to invest in the playing staff."

Better than a specialist monkey hanger.

i voted for them Well done!